112 replies to this topic

[Sjorpha]

It's correct to do whatever maxes the chances of winning, no one did anything wrong in those videos.

The heavies in Div 5 shouldn't be there, but that's a completely different issue.

Edited by Sjorpha, 19 April 2018 - 03:04 PM.

[Kubernetes]

oneproduct, on 19 April 2018 - 12:47 PM, said:

How would you feel if there was some arena-feature that allowed lights to negate their disadvantage in a similar way?

You mean like how arenas are large enough such that a light can outrange and kite a brawl-centric assault? Clearly these large arenas are an unfair advantage for lights. They don’t have to get into your effective SRM/LBx range, ever. It’s so unfair that a light can use its speed to make an assault mech worthless! PGI needs to shrink all the arenas so lights can’t play keep-away and are forced to knife-fight every match.

[5th Fedcom Rat]

Kubernetes, on 19 April 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:

You mean like how arenas are large enough such that a light can outrange and kite a brawl-centric assault? Clearly these large arenas are an unfair advantage for lights. They don’t have to get into your effective SRM/LBx range, ever.

That's actually more difficult than it sounds (hence why almost no one is doing it). The reason is because the brawl centric assaults tend to have LBX, which despite being ideal brawling weapons, also have tremendous range and are easy to tag lights at distance with.

[Kubernetes]

5th Fedcom Rat, on 19 April 2018 - 03:17 PM, said:

That's actually more difficult than it sounds (hence why almost no one is doing it). The reason is because the brawl centric assaults tend to have LBX, which despite being ideal brawling weapons, also have tremendous range and are easy to tag lights at distance with.

It takes work, but it’s doable. I used to do it in scouting quite a bit against brawly mediums. They can tag you with LBx, but at 400-500m damage is spread all over.

Regardless, a heavy or assault is under no obligation to fight a light on the light’s terms. The entire arena is available for use, not just open areas in the middle.

[Havyek]

It's not fair for you to run circles around them either. Both of you stand in the centre, 100m from each other and alpha until dead.


Fair fight.

[Relixander]

Until there is qualitative judging, if you win will be far more important than how you win.
So basically, never.

Edited by Relixander, 19 April 2018 - 03:51 PM.

[Vanguard319]

Ryllen Kriel, on 19 April 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

When mixed martial arts first became popularized in the States with the UFC people enjoyed the spectacle of mismatched opponents going at one another. You could see a sumo go up against an animal style Kung Fu practitioner. Was it balanced? Hell no, it was entertaining. I never heard anyone tell one of the fighters about rules to limit basic methods of self defence however. Royce Gracie guarded his back because that's what they train you to do in Jujitsu. I remember hearing people calling him insults I'm not allowed to type on these forums, thinking he was a coward for being in a guard position when he fought against a faster striker. It was a valid strategy because he used what he was good at.

The OP doesn't seem to understand that the Rifleman pilot immediately saw what his strategy was and reacted to it. A Rifleman mech can't turn as fast as a Locust, it has poor weapon convergence at close range and the backup lasers in the side torsos have limited pitch angle for shooting downwards at light mechs around it's feet. Backing against a wall is totally a valid tactic, especially since the OP tried to angle behind the Rifleman first thing to shoot his back. Both pilots had good situational awareness at the beginning of the match. I commend the Locust pilot for seeking cover and still managing to use speed to get a win. What really baffles me is that he won and created this thread where no one cheated or used an invalid tactic. This thread therefore is just about boasting about a win.

Currently Solaris is like the first UFCs, it's a spectacle. There isn't much balance with the Divisions as they are, but it's better than a free-for-all because all we would see would be a handful of meta builds. OP, you can't enjoy the speed of a light and not expect a heavier mech to guard it's back. Like UFC, will Solaris eventually categorize mech chassis by weight? Perhaps it would be more fair to do that and a mix of meta-based divisions. Things would become fair but at the cost of the current spectacle.

While I can see the comparison to MMA fighting, I also have to point out that it's not without controversy. Remember the fight between Fallon Fox and Tamikka Brents?

https://thelibertari...emale-opponent/

Solaris has the same problem. King Crabs and Annihilators are dominating their respective divisions atm, and why wouldn't they? They're both tanky, and can field devastating amounts of firepower. My first two fights pitted me against back to back assault mechs. On the third time, I said **** it and rolled out my loyalty King Crab, only to get a very unsatisfying win against the Bushwhacker who was my opponent. The only match I've had so far where I was out weighed and came close to winning was a Stormcrow v Kodiak fight where I would have won with one more clean hit if my hvy lasers weren't destroyed, my UAC 20 didn't run out of ammo, and melee was possible.

If anything, we should have divisions based on mech class, like we had in MW4: Mercenaries. Hell, maybe some battle Royale mode where 8 players enter, and only one leaves.

[Throe]

Darian DelFord, on 18 April 2018 - 09:18 PM, said:

That will not help the situation. Besides PGI is cut the lights off at the legs with how small these maps are. That is one of the biggest issues.

I think this might be one of the only parts about the Solaris maps that bothers me a little bit. Super long range weapons are utterly pointless. However, if you think about how easy it would be to "hide" from a super long range build on a very large map in 1v1 combat, there's really not much point to considering that type of weapon for this type of game mode.

Of course, the above comment says nothing about the ability of the lighter 'Mech in any given engagement to use their speed advantage properly. I don't even run Lights in Solaris, and I won't play Boreal Reach for precisely that reason. The choke point in the center of the map makes it almost impossible to use speed to your advantage, and unless you're running an Assault(something I also don't do in Solaris) you absolutely need to be able to use your speed when you're facing off against a 100 tonner.

Edited by Throe, 23 April 2018 - 03:12 PM.

[Throe]

Kubernetes, on 19 April 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:

You mean like how arenas are large enough such that a light can outrange and kite a brawl-centric assault? Clearly these large arenas are an unfair advantage for lights. They don’t have to get into your effective SRM/LBx range, ever. It’s so unfair that a light can use its speed to make an assault mech worthless! PGI needs to shrink all the arenas so lights can’t play keep-away and are forced to knife-fight every match.

These arenas are *not* large. If anything needs to be done to Arena size, it's Boreal Reach that needs changed. It's central choke point is *far* too small.

[Brain Cancer]

I'm just going to leave this here.

[Stinger554]

Brain Cancer, on 23 April 2018 - 03:37 PM, said:

I'm just going to leave this here.

Would you be terribly offended if I use this video to showcase just how ineffective lrms are? Mind you I only watched the first fight but you used almost all of your 800 lrms to kill a hunchback lol.

[Darian DelFord]

Throe, on 23 April 2018 - 03:16 PM, said:

These arenas are *not* large. If anything needs to be done to Arena size, it's Boreal Reach that needs changed. It's central choke point is *far* too small.

They all need to be made larger

[Mystere]

Take note that my comment is not directly pointed at you ...

Alexander of Macedon, on 19 April 2018 - 02:39 AM, said:

It's perfectly fine if people want to hide in corners all match.

What pisses me off is when they complain that it's unfair for the light to refuse to engage that and let it time out for a tie.

The hypocrisy I am detecting in this thread is absolutely hilarious. People cried loudly and incessantly when the last player allegedly "hid" to allegedly "preserve their KDR" and that they should be permanently banned for "non-participation". But lo and behold, "non-participation" is suddenly a perfectly valid tactic in Solaris.

<smh>

Darian DelFord, on 19 April 2018 - 03:39 AM, said:

Hmmm wonder if this tactic would be considered non participation.

See above.

sycocys, on 19 April 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

"It's all about leet skills, twisting damage, protecting legs, being a better shot, running the uber builds with your e-sports + your epeen! IDGAF, if you don't like this kind of competitive mode you can go back to quickplay"

..... back into a corner when a light mech drops.

I just find it entertaining.

Entertaining indeed!

I think I now have the motivation I need to drop in lights.

Edited by Mystere, 24 April 2018 - 12:09 AM.

[Brain Cancer]

Stinger554, on 23 April 2018 - 03:55 PM, said:

Would you be terribly offended if I use this video to showcase just how ineffective lrms are? Mind you I only watched the first fight but you used almost all of your 800 lrms to kill a hunchback lol.

Not my video, but feel free to show exactly how long and how slow LRMs take to kill something without other people joining in.

[Brain Cancer]

Mystere, on 24 April 2018 - 12:03 AM, said:

Take note that my comment is not directly pointed at you ...

The hypocrisy I am detecting in this thread is absolutely hilarious. People cried loudly and incessantly when the last player allegedly "hid" to allegedly "preserve their KDR" and that they should be permanently banned for "non-participation". But lo and behold, "non-participation" is suddenly a perfectly valid tactic in Solaris.

Not moving when the opponent knows where you are and can easily reach/target you is hardly non-participation. Nor is finding a superior position for you and sticking to it, again noting that your opponent can certainly kill you if he shoots you enough.

It'd be like saying not giving up a spot where you trade 3 damage dealt for every one you take in QP is non-participation because you wouldn't move up and be machine-gunned to death. The solution is actually making those areas out of bounds, meaning you can hug the wall for short periods of time but can't stay there- and you can zip into the map edge briefly to hit people who no longer can fully cover their backs.

[Mystere]

Brain Cancer, on 19 April 2018 - 08:13 AM, said:

Somehow, I don't think we're getting that as a Solaris add-on.

But seriously, there are things that could be done, like adding arena hazards that make corners....ahem..."spicy" if you hang out there.

Add various flavors of nasty (turrets, rock fall AOEs, bombs, etc) that have visible warnings, long enough for any kind of parked type to move out of the way. Otherwise, enjoy your free laser trim or personal rock garden from that cave-in and suffer some damage for keeping to a totally static form of gameplay. Bonus: If you're good, you may even be able to lure an opponent into these hazards for an assist. Double bonus: You can actually take a page from the original Solaris and have mobile cover, like pillars that rise and fall randomly.

Alternatively, map edges can be given a "ring out" similar to what we have in QP/FP maps. This allows people to use the edge for brief periods of time, but you can't just park there and give your opponent a perfect frontal facing 100%.

I think we just found a good excuse to bring back artillery and air strikes -- but this time make them unlimited.

[Mystere]

Brain Cancer, on 24 April 2018 - 12:14 AM, said:

Not moving when the opponent knows where you are and can easily reach/target you is hardly non-participation. Nor is finding a superior position for you and sticking to it, again noting that your opponent can certainly kill you if he shoots you enough.

It'd be like saying not giving up a spot where you trade 3 damage dealt for every one you take in QP is non-participation because you wouldn't move up and be machine-gunned to death. The solution is actually making those areas out of bounds, meaning you can hug the wall for short periods of time but can't stay there- and you can zip into the map edge briefly to hit people who no longer can fully cover their backs.

I think you missed my point. Switch "non-participation" with "refusing to engage the enemy" and hopefully it becomes clearer.

[Old-dirty B]

So, when exactly is someone not participating or not engaging the enemy? Although i have had some boring or frustrating games were someone was in turret mode against a wall, i wouldn't want to call that not participating... The other way around, i'm not rushing straight at my opponent with my locust, so i wait behind cover out of sight for an opportunity to attack, this could take some time... i wouldn't want to call that non-participating either. But both might seem so, at least from a distance...

Why give up an advantage to move out to play your opponents game?

In a 1v1 anything goes, especially when the only way to win or lose is by destruction of your opponent or yourself. No matter what you do to this game, as long as there's just one way to win it will be like this...

To properly solve this, there should be some other objectives that force you to move out otherwise you will loose. These other objectives should cater to both ends, at one end big firepower and the other end speed. One objective, to directly win by destroying something on the opposing side of the map (base, dropship etc) where big and sustainable firepower is an advantage. The other objective where speed matters the most, capping to win on timeout. To win, you have to take risk and move out, either to destroy something or to cap. These objectives can also be used to lure out your opponent and thus enforcing a fight... just waiting mostly results in a loss, unless you have setup a perfect ambush around your base or dropship...

Anyway, this is what you get with 1v1 deathmatch no matter what "tricks" you add to punish passive behaviour.

[Anjian]

B3R3ND, on 18 April 2018 - 11:34 PM, said:

It's 1v1 - anything goes... a good duelist will play their mech to its strength and to its opponents weakness... often that will appear as unfair.

Here's a good story about Miyamoto Musashi, one of the greatest warriors and duelist of all times, and the duel he had with his greatest and most skilled opponent Sasaki Kojiro (aka Ganryu):

"Sasaki developed a very effective Kenjutsu style based on the movement of a swallow's tail in flight. Unlike other samurai who used the traditional 'katana', Sasaki used a 'no-dachi', which was a very long two-handed sword. Despite the sword's length and weight, Kojiro's strikes with the weapon were unusually quick and precise. Kojiro was Lord Hosokawa Tadaoki's private kenjutsu instructor.

The two greatest swordsmen agreed to fight, and the duel took place on April 13, 1612 on Ganryu Island, located off the coast of the Bizen Province. The duel was set for early the next morning. On the day of the fight, Sasaki Kojiro and the officials serving as witnesses waited for Musashi for hours. His absence lead to the rumor that Musashi had run away in fear of his life because he was so terrified of Sasaki Kojiro's technique. Nothing was further from the truth.

Miyamoto Musashi was transported to Ganryu Island on boat by a local fisherman, and, as part of his strategy, he arrived late for the duel once again, thus disturbing his opponent's inner state. During the short trip, he sculpted a wooden sword which he used for the duel against Sasaki Kojiro.

When the boat finally arrived, Sasaki and the officials were standing on the beach waiting for Musashi. Extremely irritated and blinded by rage, Sasaki Kojiro drew his katana and threw away his scabbard. Musashi saw this gesture and said to his enemy, "If you have no more use for your sheath, you are already dead."

The dual began, and both men were on guard with respect for the other's ability. One mistake, and it would all be over. Musashi provoked Kojiro into making the first attack, and then countered quickly, breaking Kojiro's left ribs and puncturing his lungs, thus killing him.

Before running back to his boat, Musashi bowed to his downed opponent and the officials, realizing with sadness that one of the greatest swordsmen ever had just died. It was at this point that Musashi attained satori or spiritual awakening. From this moment on he renounced ever doing lethal duels."

To conclude, i will approach and leave any 1v1 with honour and respect, exchanging polite greetings and so on, but what happens in between is not bound to any rule (unless enforced by the game).

This story missed something.


And that is, what Musashi was sculpting was the oar of the boat he was riding.

Regardless of the "inner state", Musashi knew how long Kojiro's sword was, and used a longer implement --- the boat oar --- against him.

When you consider how the end of a boat oar looks like, its like an axe. And the story goes, Musashi smacked his opponent in the head with it.

In other words, although Musashi did psychologically disrupt his enemy, its the fact that he researched his opponent and figured out a specific counter to him, was the decisive factor of the battle.

Edited by Anjian, 24 April 2018 - 01:57 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

To sum this all up:
Solaris is nasty. Brutal win at all costs nasty,
If you can't accept that, don't do it.
any notion of sportsmanship or fair play doesn't apply here.
If you can't accept that, don't do it.
This mode will expose your flaws and your strengths,
If you can't accept that, don't do it.